NK17
Senior Member
- Messages
- 592
Your guess makes very much sense Mark!My guess - and it really is a complete guess - is that they encountered some difficulties finding a high-profile publisher for the follow-up study which had basically the same results as the first study, and pretty soon they found they were then into a whole new ball-game - funding and preparation for the big multicentre follow-up study must have been the top priority, and with the UK Rituximab study getting funded, we now have at least two replication studies in progress for the Rituximab results. So what would be the benefit of publishing the 2nd Rituximab study now? Minimal, perhaps...and maybe the cost/benefit just didn't justify the time it would have taken to complete it. I can certainly relate to the experience of being absolutely committed to doing something, and planning to do it, and then finding myself snowed under with even higher priorities arising from the original plan. One thing I'm confident of, they and our other top researchers are committed to progressing the science of ME/CFS as soon as possible, and all the researchers I've met are passionate and engaged and determined, and they have a lot more understanding than I do about the detail of these issues. I'd like to see that follow-up study published, but the two Rituximab replication studies are far more important...if it's a question of where to spend limited time, the two replication studies have to be their top priority...
The two Rituximab replication studies are of absolute, tantamount importance!!
Next we need a third one here in the US!!!
By the way thanks for tweeting from the conference.